Whether contemporary consumer cultures across the globe are becoming homogenized or whether they are still characterized by a high degree of heterogeneity has been the topic of a lively debate within the social sciences for more than a decade. On one side of this debate stand proponents of the homogenization thesis who argue that the proliferation of large multinational companies colonize local cultures (e.g. Ritzer 1996). On the other side are scholars who argue for alternatives to the globalization of consumer cultures and illustrate how consumers might, to follow the typology suggested by Belk & Ger (1996), resort to nationalism and a return to the roots, consumer resistance, local appropriation, or creolization. Thompson and Arsel (2004) question both the heterogenization and the homogenization strands and suggest that large, dominant corporations might forge hegemonic brandscapes. By this, the authors mean “the hegemonic influences that global experiential brands exert on their local competitors and the meanings consumers derive from their experiences of these glocal servicescapes” (Thompson and Arsel 2004: 632). The purposes here are twofold: we wish to explore how the hegemonic brandscape may operate in a cultural context outside of North America by exploring coffee cultural discourses in the Scandinavian context. As a kind of commentary to, or re-inquiry of, Thompson and Arsel’s 1 (2004) study of the hegemonic influence that the Seattle-based company Starbucks exerts on the US coffee culture we explore how the logic of the hegemonic brandscape becomes glocalized in the Scandinavian context. While we generally agree with the analysis and take seriously the proposition that Starbucks exerts a global structure of common difference on local coffee cultures across the globe, we wish to explore and illustrate how different local market contexts implies different competitive and positioning roles for Starbucks and the like. Secondly, and more importantly, our purpose is also a more general one: namely to explore whether there is such a thing as a specific Scandinavian consumer culture that interact with global structures in the process of glocalization. The article and the supplementary videography therefore explore how such a consumer culture historically deals with flows of the global cultural economy. Coffee culture seems an eminent site of exploration as Scandinavia constitutes the world’s highest per capita consumption of coffee. Our empirical investigations in Scandinavia, a cultural setting where Starbucks has yet not entered the market albeit gained significant cultural influence, show that there is a long-standing historically established coffee culture that exists in parallel to both a starbuckified coffee culture and a coffee connoisseurship culture. Our detailed analysis of this coffee consumptionscape illustrate that there is a plurality of cultural styles along which the different types of coffee establishments differ. At the same time, we show that there are tendencies toward the hegemonic influx of starbuckified dimensions suggested by Thompson and Arsel. GLOCALIZATION Glocalization, as coined by Robertson (1992), is often held to suggest an intermingling of the global and the local. However, the concept is more complex than that. Glocalization not only implies how local cultures adapt and re-interpret global influences. It impies that local—or the idea of the local—becomes global; a universal idea which becomes culturally significant exactly because of an emerging consciousness of the “world as a whole” (Robertson 1992). In the 2 context of marketing and branding this has been explored by Ger (1999) in her suggestion of mobilization of local cultural capital enabling local firms to “outlocal the global competition”. The other dimension of glocalization means that the global always is localized; that is, re- interpreted to fit with local cultural frames of reference – as argued by Miller on Coca Cola in Trinidad (Miller 1998). Often research in consumption and brand culture suggest that the presence of a transnational brand establishes structures of common difference (Wilk 1995) along which competing (local) brands have to define themselves. For example, in Thompson and Arsel’s work, competing brand establishments have emerged as a response to the massive presence of a single brand. Put bluntly, in the US there was no local coffee consumptionscape prior to Starbucks. The authors claim that there were only 200 freestanding coffee houses in 1990 compared to 14,000 in 2003 (2004: 631). In the empirical setting of this project, there are no single competitive actors or brands which define the competitive situation. Still, many of the structures of common difference established by Starbucks are winning ground but interact with a historically constituted coffee culture. This historically constituted coffee culture also comprises certain structural rules of brand competition in the coffee culture. This hence constitutes a different hegemonic struggle in the Scandinavian cultural context than in the US context. In this sense we understand the local coffee culture more in terms of a hegemonic consumptionscape than a hegemonic brandscape. COFFEE GROUNDS: THE SCANDINAVIAN COFFEE CONSUMPTIONSCAPE In the following section we will describe the local coffee consumptionscape. The local coffee culture and its history will be described at some length in order for the reader to be able to follow how dominant ideas of global consumption ideals are diffused. Also, the overview of the contemporary Scandinavian coffee consumptionscape describes the canvas on which the structures of common differences of starbuckification needs to be inscribed. It is crucial when 3 discussing globalization tendencies to remember that globalization is by no means something that happened all of a sudden during the latter part of the twentieth century when multinational companies began spreading their products all over the globe. Instead, it can be seen as the constant back and forth flow of ideas and goods that has historically characterized most parts of the world for millenniums (Robertson 1992)1. This perspective is for example advocated by Elliott (2001) in her analysis of Starbucks where she sees coffee as a form of transborder communication. For Scandinavia, located on the far northern rim of Europe, globalization has always been of utmost centrality. During a couple of hundred years around the turn of the first millennium Scandinavians were on the sending side of globalization as the Vikings raided large parts of Europe, Russia, and as far down as Turkey, and thus spread the Scandinavian culture. Since then, however, Scandinavia has mostly been on the receiving side of globalization and has readily adopted the behaviors gleaned from continental Europe. It is in the light of this historically longstanding willingness to accept and adopt ideas from continental Europe that the Scandinavian coffee culture must be viewed. Coffee drinking in this part of the world has been an integral part of social life for a long time and was initially introduced in Europe during the latter parts of the seventeenth century. Some like to locate the beginning of European coffee culture in London, where Brits returning from traveling in the Ottoman empire brought with them the habit of drinking coffee. The first coffee house in London opened its doors to the public as early as 1652. London coffee culture prospered for about a hundred years but then gradually lost out to the tea-drinking that we to this day associate with the Brits (Ellis 2006). Therefore, others like to point at the Turkish siege of Vienna in 1683 as the starting point. When the Turks left the city, the Turkish coffee culture was left behind and the first café was opened in 1 One may argue that the Copernican revolution was a necessary component in the development of globalization since it constituted the possibility of one of the key elements of globalization, namely the consciousness of the world as a whole (Robertson 1992) or a global reflexivity (Waters 2001). However, the processes of increasing time-space distantiation have occurred prior to that, particularly in connection with historical world systems such as the Roman empire (Friedman 1995). 4 1685 in the living room of Johannes Deodat, an Armenian spy (Öberg 2005). Throughout the seventeenth century, coffee drinking was spread amongst the upper-class in Europe but the habit quickly trickled down to the lower classes who drank coffee for its invigorating qualities, and to cure hangovers and flatulence. Shortly after the rise of coffee culture in Vienna, it was introduced in Scandinavia but for slightly different reasons. In Sweden, for example, coffee was placed on the pharmacy list of approved drugs in 1687 and was recommended for overall strengthening of the stamina. But coffee drinking quickly gained popularity outside of the medical purposes and finally became so popular in Sweden that the state saw no other solution than to ban coffee drinking in the summer of 1794 to save the state finances. Too much money was pouring out of the country and the state could come up with no other way to stop the outflow. A special police force was designated to patrol the cities and those caught in the act of drinking coffee were sent to prison (Svenska Kaffeakademien 2006). During these times, coffee houses served an important social function and were perhaps equivalent to the so-called third spaces (Oldenburg 1989) recently given sociological attention and attributed to some of the success of Starbucks (Thompson and Arsel 2004). Much of the intellectual and not least political development of Europe took place in coffee houses during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Elliott 2001; Ellis 2006; Guggenbühl 2003), and a parallel development could be detected in Scandinavia. To this day, cafés and coffee shops have served an important social role and some of the existing coffee serving establishments date back to the late 19th century, a few even earlier than that. In the latter part of the twentieth century coffee cultures flowed, creolized and materialized in new forms as a global cultural economy emerged.